Nielzie wrote:I'm afraid that won't happen for most of the SE plugins that you use right now. The 64-bit version requires 64-bit SEMS (modules). Current 32-bit SEMS are not compatible, and will not be supported via a 32-bit bridge. This means at first most existing project files will not work in the 64-bit version because the SEMs are not available.

A lot of developers use 3rd party modules from different sources for their plugins. Those modules would all have to be rebuild (a lot of work) for 64-bit by their developers.

Chris Kerry for instance, has made an enormous amount of SE modules. It would take him almost a life-time to convert all of them to 64-bit (which he won;t do, he already said).

As I said somewhere before - I'll add quite a lot of modules(for free) - when SE1.2 64bit goes public, but only 'audio processing' modules though. I've already replicated (for personal use) - a lot of modules from DH ,CK, and SC. Most of it is exceptionally easy(+/- 30min worth of work per module). To port modules is only "alot of work" if the module is SDK2 and/or uses assembly code(assembly is what a lot of CK modules uses as well as some Native SE modules actually.)

Alot of Chis Kerry's modules - will be severely missed though - i.e. Oscillators, clocks and Midi stuff. Hopefully someone else will step up to the plate to help out with those kind of modules. I'll cover filters, probably some envelopes, distortion and clipping , any math conversion(volt2dB, time to kHz etc) and probably a bunch of other small yet usefull/new things.

Xavier (kx77free) is currently working hard to build some 64bit templates - over at the SDK group, for different compilers - and Jeff is workig on the 64bit 'Save-as-VST' feature. Progress is progress, some projects might die - but new/better projects will rise from their ashes.

the reputation of a tool mostly comes from what is said about it. or, not said.

& what's said about it comes from what's made using it.

Do you think people are bashing SE-made plugins for fun, for the name? Once you've tried a couple of SE plugins and they were all crap, whenever a new SE plugin comes up you may not bother to try it, it doesn't matter how good it can be, it suffers from the image of the other plugins.

If you really believe people are bashing SE plugins for some obscure technical reason that only a few have heard about..

I also know several plugins which are crap (or overpriced) that are programmed in C+.
But I do not read "is it made with C++?" in threads here...

Late to the party, but SynthEdit plugs can be just as good as anything else, especially since it can be extended with at least C++. It's just as possible to make good plugs -- or bad plugs -- with SynthEdit as anything else. The only real issues are that it isn't 64-bit and that it can have issues with multiple cores. (Only a few of us hate how it litters your file system instead of linking into a single dll or shared library, so that's a minor issue overall.)

Refreshing to see so many that recognize Synthedit has potential for outstanding and terrible and its the hands that work it that make that call.

I love Synthedit good ones. I was one that tried the beta a long time ago, but had to admit it was more than I could take on to put out a vst that was unique and sounded great. I'll let others do that. I have a small collection of SE vst's I love using still.

If SE is so good, why are there so few good SE synths out there (there indeed are a couple of exceptions)? I have tried quite a few, but somehow one can usually tell from the sound if a synth is native or SE. Often SE synths are overloaded with features and controls these days. Even with good SE synths effects for instance tend to sound poor, they often have that metal touch.
And even good SE synths are not seldom partially done in C++, like the Swiss Oberheim emulation, what't it called... I guess it is no coincidence CK has kind of abandoned SE and is now programming synths from scratch as I read somewhere...

I hear what I hear, either it impresses me or it doesn't. I would be naive to think it is mere coincidence that hand-coded synths appeal more to me than SE ones usually do. When you have tried dozens of instruments, it ceases to be bad luck.

i'll introduce your ears to mr. fft analyser so we can have a good look at the se oscs, but today's my birthday so you'll have to suffer your delusion for a while longer because i'll be f**ked if i'm going to spend my time involved with it.

you come and go, you come and go. amitabha xoxos.net free vst. neither a follower nor a leader betagore "where roads are made i lose my way"

Watch your profanity, preppy What's your problem? Do you work for Synthedit or what? Anyway, I am not saying that SE stuff cannot sound good, all I am saying is that about 90+% of SE synths are not good enough for professional applications, some are more like toys in my view. As I said before there are exceptions, no doubt, but the mass determines the reputation of SE, not the exceptions.

Actually, just yesterday I stumbled upon a very good sounding SE synth. I found it on the site of a developer (whom I won't mention as I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings) who seems to make lots of plugins as a hobby. I downloaded and tried several of his many synths just for fun, but except for two they just don't sound good enough for me. Of those two good-sounding ones one has an annoying interface which makes it a pain to use. But the one remaining is really nice. I guess I will donate and get it It's like the needle in the haystack No idea why that one is so much better than the rest of his synths (though there still is room for optimization)...

But it is symptomatic for SE synths in my view. It is not the first site of that kind where they have dozens of plugins, that are basically very similar to each other, standard stuff that doesn't sound good.
There are some rather sophisticated SE synths, like the Memorymoon stuff, but it is not overly reliable. Those three synths came with my DAW, but I don't use them as they are "heavy" and crash from time to time. I can do without that, although I do like some of their sounds.

What I am also saying is that synths programmed from scratch tend to be better, probably because programmers know more about even the tiniest details of how things work, and also because they invest more time in it. So when someone makes the effort to program such a synth for months or years even, they obviously are very ambitious, which usually shows in the product.

Since you seem to be so fond of SE, what are the 5 best pure (i.e. without additional programming) SE synths in your view? Just so that I know what you are talking about...

custom modules is additional programming
of course you need custom modules to make more specific synths

that's the whole point, SE blurs the line between easy to make synths and hardcore programming
i'm the perfect example, i'm not good enough to code a vst, but i manage to code the modules that make up a synth

as a user, you should have learned how to chose what synths to buy
look for specifications, audio examples, screenshots, reviews, demo version and so on.. what you might not like might be precious to someone else

It doesn't matter how it sounds....as long as it has BASS and it's LOUD!irc.freenode.net >>> #kvr